This is like the idiots a few years ago who compromised a car radio (using an MP3 CD exploit), and claimed to have hacked the vehicles communications bus (vehicles have several communication networks, and the radio, if it's on one, is usually on the low-speed, non-critical bus).

Hacking the GPS is terribly limiting in what you can do - you have to know the route and you have to target the drone. The military has known about GPS hacking for ages, anyway.

DeathByGeekSquad:krackpipe: It's great how, since the Bush and Congress cowardly and idiotic response to 9/11, the money is in surveilling and policing all of us American citizens trying to find jobs. Unless we're in police or surveillance industry, of course --- then we have jobs wasting tax dollars. So how exactly is all this revenue-sapping activity bringing the US back to prosperity again?

Fun fact: Prior to the Bush-era funding injections, the NSA's HQ was so outdated they were suffering brown-outs because of their shiatty power infrastructure that couldn't cope with their demands.

But hey, let's get pissy that we threw a bunch of money at them to fix their shiat.

/NSA was driven into the ground by civilians//Slowly making a comeback///some really interesting books on the topic

Uh, yeah, gee, what would we do with only 16 national intelligence agencies? OH THE HORROR. Who'd listen to all international phone calls without the NSA? Who'd push for government backdoors into encryption programs without them? Good thing the NSA didn't die a horrible death! I just can't get enough government surveillance of routine activities which yields no returns for the average citizen and costs a lot! Yay NSA!

Use a light plane or your own drone to send your spoof signal from above. So much for that directional fix.

You try that and stuff on the ground is going to notice quickly. Both the FCC and the FCC will ream you out assuming the NSA or USAF don't get to you first.

Couple of issues there:1. I probably only need to spoof a drone for a matter of a minute or two to crash it in to something.2. I only really need to spoof the altitude reading if I'm not picky about what I crash it in to. Stuff on the ground becomes less likely to notice.3. If I'm doing it from a drone of my own, good luck finding me4. According to my very limited knowledge, don't they usually locate the source of such things by looking at the direction the signal is coming from, taking two or more readings and triangulating? Doesn't work well with a moving source

All of which suggests to me the safest thing is to limit the size of the drones. Something weighing 30 pounds and carrying a few gallons of fuel is of limited danger (though there are scenarios like crashing it in to a refinery, a fuel truck, etc). The bigger drones, bigger potential for problems.

xanadian:FTFA: After all, reports Newser, domestic drones are likely to use the same unencrypted GPS signals provided to civilians

wat

Ok, I can see *domestic* drones having that problem, but any owned by the DoD or DHS *should* be using the GPS signals reserved for defense and the government (they're supposed to be more accurate). Are those signals unencrypted, too?

Thats not how really how GPS works. Receivers are what cannot be super accurate, by law. You can easily make GPS devices that are accurate to within inches at home, and I have done it myself for hobbyist drone projects that I work on in my spare time.

untaken_name:krackpipe: untaken_name: krackpipe: So how exactly is all this revenue-sapping activity bringing the US back to prosperity again?

What makes you think that's the goal?

Are you uninterested in the US returning to prosperity? Uncertain what your question means.

Sure, *I* want to return the US to prosperity. But I'm not in any kind of position of power or influence. What I'm asking is: What makes you believe that the goal of the people who set policy is to return the US to prosperity? Or, more specifically, to return the average US citizen to prosperity?

Thanks for clarifying. I have no idea if it's the goal of the people who set policy to return the US to prosperity. I believe it should be one of their primary goals however, if they care about our country. That's why I asked the question.

Thanks for clarifying. Your question appears to be a separate issue from the point I made. My question assumes that a return of US prosperity is a good thing, at least for Americans. If that's true, we should be aiming for that at the policy level. Whether or not they are doing that (your question), I have no idea. Regardless, however, if even just you and I agree that it's a worthwhile goal to return the US to prosperity, how is the US going to arrive at that by burning through outrageous amounts of money and public trust to create a Panopticon?

Your question is how I know this or that about policy makers' goals. My answer to that question is "I cannot read minds and have no idea what their goals are."

krackpipe:Regardless, however, if even just you and I agree that it's a worthwhile goal to return the US to prosperity, how is the US going to arrive at that by burning through outrageous amounts of money and public trust to create a Panopticon?

Well, they aren't. Basically, the point that I was making was that the people who set policy do so for the benefit of a very small group of people, compared to the general population. NOT for the benefit of the people paying for the policies that they set. The reason you aren't seeing the US return to general wealth and prosperity is because if that happens, a small group of people would have to give up some of their insane wealth and control, and the more wealth and control they have, the less likely they are to give any of it up. It's a vicious cycle which is killing the US, and probably the rest of the world, too.

Kuoxasar:I'm expecting someone who campaigned on a generally liberal civil liberties platform, who's a constitutional lawyer, to perhaps care or be alarmed rather than say nothing.

HA when he caved on the new york trials in favor of tribunals at gitmo i figured we were screwed. his whole record since jan 2009 is Bush lite. and in some cases Bush extreme. it's been a major disappointment to me.

ok i probably was naive but damn the difference for pre to post inauguration was huge.

Use a light plane or your own drone to send your spoof signal from above. So much for that directional fix.

You try that and stuff on the ground is going to notice quickly. Both the FCC and the FCC will ream you out assuming the NSA or USAF don't get to you first.

Couple of issues there:1. I probably only need to spoof a drone for a matter of a minute or two to crash it in to something.2. I only really need to spoof the altitude reading if I'm not picky about what I crash it in to. Stuff on the ground becomes less likely to notice.3. If I'm doing it from a drone of my own, good luck finding me4. According to my very limited knowledge, don't they usually locate the source of such things by looking at the direction the signal is coming from, taking two or more readings and triangulating? Doesn't work well with a moving source

All of which suggests to me the safest thing is to limit the size of the drones. Something weighing 30 pounds and carrying a few gallons of fuel is of limited danger (though there are scenarios like crashing it in to a refinery, a fuel truck, etc). The bigger drones, bigger potential for problems.

1. True if you don't care what you are crashing it into and just want to ground it. If you have a specific target in mind you need a lot more time than that unless you happen to find a drone on a flight path close to your intended target.2. This is true but if all you care about is crashing the thing then just shoot it. That is much cheaper than spoofing GPS.3. Either your drone has to be remote controlled with telemetry broadcast back to you or you have to be on line of sight with it and the target. Either way you are emitting a traceable signal. Also, do your really think the purchase of your drone isn't going to be traced? Sure, in theory you could launch your own preprogrammed drone but only if you knew exactly when and where to have it intercept the target drone and start broadcasting. Random aircraft (even drones) do get noticed and investigated quickly. Especially these days.4. It works just fine with moving sources. For that matter once they notice what is going on they don't need to triangulate. They can just follow your signal with a signal meter and a gunship. Drones fly pretty slow.

untaken_name:DeathByGeekSquad: krackpipe: It's great how, since the Bush and Congress cowardly and idiotic response to 9/11, the money is in surveilling and policing all of us American citizens trying to find jobs. Unless we're in police or surveillance industry, of course --- then we have jobs wasting tax dollars. So how exactly is all this revenue-sapping activity bringing the US back to prosperity again?

Fun fact: Prior to the Bush-era funding injections, the NSA's HQ was so outdated they were suffering brown-outs because of their shiatty power infrastructure that couldn't cope with their demands.

But hey, let's get pissy that we threw a bunch of money at them to fix their shiat.

/NSA was driven into the ground by civilians//Slowly making a comeback///some really interesting books on the topic

Uh, yeah, gee, what would we do with only 16 national intelligence agencies? OH THE HORROR. Who'd listen to all international phone calls without the NSA? Who'd push for government backdoors into encryption programs without them? Good thing the NSA didn't die a horrible death! I just can't get enough government surveillance of routine activities which yields no returns for the average citizen and costs a lot! Yay NSA!

You know how I know you know very little about the structure of our intelligence agencies?